Editorial: State budget - Easley offers guide to resolve differences
The Daily Reflector
June 16, 2006

North Carolina residents will be watching Raleigh closely in the coming days as the state House and Senate look to resolve differences in their respective budgets. With the House's vote on Thursday, each chamber has now approved a budget proposal and will enter negotiations to produce a final spending plan.

Those negotiations are of vital importance to the state's future, as they will determine how North Carolina utilizes a rare budget surplus projected to be $2 billion. While the emphasis should be on pay raises and tax relief when employing that surplus, lawmakers should look to Gov. Mike Easley's original budget proposal for guidance.

The House gave final approval on Thursday to an $18.9 billion state budget. On several points, it echoes the already approved Senate budget. It would give pay raises to teachers and to state workers, both long overdue. Both would provide significant financial relief for state mental health services and would set aside $500 million in emergency reserve and capital construction funds. And each would reduce the state sales tax and the income tax on the highest bracket, both increases approved in the budget mess of 2001.

However, when the Legislature convened for this year's short session, Easley offered a reasonable proposal for how lawmakers could best amend the two-year state budget approved last year. The Senate followed those recommendations with fewer deviations than the House, and it looks to be the superior plan on several points.

First, Easley would set aside $3 million in lottery money for his More at Four early education funding. While the lottery revenue is not expected to meet the projected $425 million this year, early childhood education holds tremendous promise to raise the level of achievement later in students' academic careers. It is worth further consideration.

Second, the House removed a provision to increase the minimum wage. Since the House has already approved a $1 increase in a separate bill, and the Senate has included it in its budget bill, the two sides must seek to resolve that difference, ensuring that the increase becomes law.

Third, the two chambers handle pay increases differently. Both provide teachers an 8 percent increase, but the Senate gives state workers a 4 percent increase, while the House provides one-time bonuses. The men and women who staff the state's vital services deserves better than what the House provides.

As well, counties such as Pitt have looked to the Legislature to assist in generating local revenue through a sales tax increase. However, no such proposal has been subject to a floor debate in the budget discussion. That revenue is sorely needed here for public education. The Legislature should either dramatically increase funding for school construction or enable Pitt County to use sales tax revenue for that purpose.

In all, lawmakers in both chambers believe that the differences between the two budget plans will be swiftly and easily resolved. Certainly residents hope that is the case. But the important thing is to get these items correct, not simply finished, and Gov. Easley's blueprint should be the guide for doing so.